pilots refuse to fly with gun loons onboard

On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 18:24:41 GMT, Martin Hotze
wrote:

M (mashall): Mr terrorist, drop your gun!
T (terrorist): drop yours or I'll shoot this *pointing* guy!
M: no way!
T: *bammm* - drop it now? or I shoot this *pointing again* kid here!
M: nooooo!
T: *bamm*

what do you think? will the marshals all be little Rambos without a heart?

No, Martin. If T moves his gun towards any civilian he gets one in the
head and heart. Hardly Rambo style; only two bullets.

Rob

Morton Davis wrote:

Box cutters could easily be concealed in shoes, up the rectum or vagina ,

It's like Mort came from a completely different planet, isn't it?


-*MORT*-

Eddy_Down wrote:



Morton Davis wrote:

Box cutters could easily be concealed in shoes, up the rectum or vagina ,


It's like Mort came from a completely different planet, isn't it?

On our planet rectums and vaginas have small openings.

--
Chris.
http://****france.com/

New Zealand tubbies.
http://www.geocities.com/libassbug/nztubbies.jpg

Vengeance is a hamburger that is eaten cold, writes Georges Dupuy in
Liberation.

No wonder the French military is a band of sissies, look at where they
get their stock from. (800k mpeg file.)
http://www.geocities.com/libassbug/frenchfighters.mpeg

funny mp3
http://www.geocities.com/libassbug/horserace.mp3

The new Three Stooge's
http://www.geocities.com/libassbug/happyfamily.jpg

Two clowns.
http://www.geocities.com/libassbug/groggyclown.jpg
http://www.geocities.com/libassbug/nickclown.jpg

"LIBassbug" wrote in message

Box cutters could easily be concealed in shoes, up the rectum or vagina
,


It's like Mort came from a completely different planet, isn't it?

On our planet rectums and vaginas have small openings.

Not after Mort's stuffed them full of razor blades...

"Eddy_Down" wrote in message

Box cutters could easily be concealed in shoes, up the rectum or vagina
,

It's like Mort came from a completely different planet, isn't it?

When he hunted naked, he had to keep his knife somewhere.

"Eddy_Down" wrote in message

Box cutters could easily be concealed in shoes, up the rectum or vagina
,

It's like Mort came from a completely different planet, isn't it?

When he hunted naked, he had to keep his knife somewhere.

On Thu, 01 Jan 2004 13:25:22 GMT,
(Nick Cooper) wrote:

On Thu, 01 Jan 2004 00:27:48 GMT, " Bogart "
wrote:

On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 23:06:46 GMT,
(Nick Cooper) wrote:

On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 02:32:14 GMT, " Bogart "
wrote:

On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 00:25:04 GMT,
(Nick Cooper) wrote:

On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 20:06:08 GMT, " Bogart "
wrote:

On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 20:12:56 +0000, Shaun
wrote:

On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 19:06:55 GMT, " Bogart "
wrote:

On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 18:50:49 -0000, "nick"
wrote:

"Some flights to the US could be grounded after the airline pilots' union
called on its members not to fly with armed sky marshals on board."

"Airline pilots should not take off with marshals on board, the British
Airline Pilots' Association (Balpa) has said."

"Capt Granshaw defended pilots' right to take action and said: "Our advice
to pilots is that until adequate written and agreed assurances are received,
flight crew should not operate flights where sky marshals are carried."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3357309.stm

Maybe you 'fraidy cats would like us to loan you some properly trained
US Sky Marshals?

Are they as cowardly as the US passengers who were too scared to deal
with four arabs armed with carpet knifes

What 4 Arabs armed with Carpet knives?

The ones on three out of four planes that took off one September
mornign a couple of years back

You mean the guys carrying BOX CUTTERS?

Maybe you should have read the thread properly. I merely pointed out
what Shaun was obviously refering to when Bogart either didn't or
pretended not to understand. Incidentally, not everyone calls them
"box cutters" - the term was certainly unknown in the UK beforehand.

And Mort twice took the time to point out the difference between box
cutters and carpet knives. If neither Shaun nor you understand the
terminology it's none of my concern.

I think it was more a case of you making a mountain out of a molehill.
Neither the term nor the item itself is generally familiar in the UK
and Shaun - perhaps imperfectly - simply used the nearest equivalent
that _is_ recognised here. I'm sure we could come up with lots of
"unfamiliar" terms for things that you don't have in the US that you
would have to similarly "translate."
--
Nick Cooper

Actually Nick, it's you being a twit in not recognizing Shaun is
posting from antu.

On Thu, 01 Jan 2004 15:01:43 GMT, "Scout"
wrote:


" Bogart " wrote in message
ws.com...
On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 22:51:54 GMT, "Scout"
wrote:


" Bogart " wrote in message
ws.com...
On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 19:27:22 GMT, "Scout"
wrote:


" Bogart " wrote in message
ws.com...
On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 12:28:59 +0000, Shaun
wrote:

On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 00:28:34 GMT, Mongo Jones
wrote:

In talk.politics.guns

(Nick Cooper) wrote:

On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 20:44:42 GMT, Mongo Jones
wrote:

In talk.politics.guns Chris Morton wrote:

In article ,
nick
says...

"Some flights to the US could be grounded after the airline
pilots'
union
called on its members not to fly with armed sky marshals on
board."

Pizza loving anti-Semite points out that British pilots would
rather
fly into
buildings than have armed POLICE on board.

They're as big a bunch of netwits as Jew hater Nick.

We should put the British Airline Pilots' Association on notice
that
any flight WITHOUT armed sky marshals on board will be shot down
as
a
precautionary measure.

And you honestly wonder why the rest of the world has such a low
opinion of America?

And you honestly think we give a **** about some ****-whiskered
Brits
who are too ****ing stupid to safeguard their own planes?

You should, Decades of proper airline security has proved
stunningly
effective at stopping planes being hijacked

Prior to 9/11 when was the last time a US airliner was hijacked in
the
US? And what ultimately stopped the domestic hijacking?

Are you saying that only the US managed to implement proper "airline
security"?

No. I asked prior to 9/11 when was the last time a US airliner was
hijacked in the US? Would you like to take a guess?

"No"? Then your question really isn't relevent, since hijacking aren't
limited to US airliners alone.

Second why exactly should we exclude the most recent example to show
that
security was inadequate?

If you know the answer to my first question it relates directly to my
second question, What ultimately stopped domestic hijacking?

Nothing. 9/11 stands forth as an example that domestic hijacking was
NEVER
stopped.

Now tie both of these two questions together with the correct answers
which I'm sure Shaun will be providing us, and then see how it relates
to the question of putting SKY MARSHALS on airplanes.

Two buildings destroyed, 4 planes with crew and passengers dead,
thousands
of lives lost, many more injured.

And a commitment to SHOOT DOWN THE NEXT PLANE THAT IS HIJACKED.

Yea, I can see how that pretty much answers the question of whether we
need
sky marshals on planes. We do. Period.

We do not need Sky Marshals on domestic airliners. Prior to 9/11 the
mindset on hijacked planes was for the passengers to just sit, be
passive and cooperate, and eventually the plane will go to Cuba or
wherever and eventually they'll be released safely and flown home.
After 9/11 passengers realized they were going on a suicide ride and
that realization caused them to adjust both their behavior and their
tactics. You will no longer see a group of passengers sit back and
meekly accept their fate when they realize they are going to die no
matter what action they take. The new mindset is, if faced with this
situation you must either fight for control of the aircraft otherwise
you will be doomed to go down with the plane anyway. So you might as
well take the hijackers with you.


Yep, and that's what happened on the 4th plane. What I want to know is how
having a sky marshal on board would have made matters worse. Would those
passengers have died twice?

How would having a SM on board have helped? The 4th plane didn't know
their fate and the fate of the other planes until long after the
terrorists had taken over the cockpit and killed the pilots. What
does the SM add that would have changed their final outcome?


Since 9/11 we've had at least 3
cases where an airliner was threatened by the behavior of an
individual on board. In all three cases these individuals were either
subdued immediately or killed by the passengers who are no longer
assuming the flight attendant is responsible for taking care of the
problem. In this type of environment the added factor of a Sky
Marshal might actually be a hinderance rather than a help as he could
be mistaken for a hijacker himself.

Well, then it would sort of behoove him not to act in a threatening manner
without cause then, wouldn't it.

Odd how we don't get a lot of cases of people jumping undercover officers on
the ground because they might be criminals.

Faulty attempt at comparisons. Draw a gun in the middle of Times
Square New Years Eve and start pointing it at everyone and see how
many people jump you. You won't have anyone asking you to show your
police badge or credentials. Only after you're beaten to a pulp will
they'll look in your pockets.

In fact, can you document even ONE case in which an air marshal was attacked
because the passengers thought he was a terrorist, hijacker, or otherwise a
threat to the craft?

There hasn't been, to my knowledge, an incident involving a terrorist
attempt since 9/11 when a SM was on board. If ever there is, you have
the potential of having the SM attacked and subdued by the passengers
before he ever gets a chance to do anything.

Sounds like empty emotional rhetoric to me.

Talk to a SM. There are whole lot of them who don't agree with you.

On Thu, 01 Jan 2004 15:08:13 GMT, "Scout"
wrote:


"Bill Funk" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 10:37:33 -0700, "Kevin McCue"
wrote:

Wanna bet your life that they wouldn't miss? I wouldn't. I'd rather
deal
with the terrorist.
Since the Dept. of Homeland Insecurity seems to think that the
terrorist are likely trained ATP's how will the Air Marshal stop them
when
they are locked behind that now reinforced, bullet proof cockpit door?

The only way a terrorist could get behind that locked, bullet proof
door is for someone to open it.
The British pliots (or rather, their union) seem to think that having
the pilots open that door is a really good idea.

Right, which is why it was managed to be opened by a couple of people armed
with nothing more than a drink cart.

How did they open a locked bullet proof door with a drink cart?

Eddy_Down wrote:

Morton Davis wrote:

Box cutters could easily be concealed in shoes, up the rectum or vagina ,

It's like Mort came from a completely different planet, isn't it?

Errr, isn't Floriduh a completely different planet?